When the young nation of Israel came out of Egypt, God called that nation "my son" in Exodus 4:22. When the baby Jesus came out of Egypt, God said, "Out of Egypt have I called my son." Matthew 2:15.
So, we have a passage in Exodus that is literally referring to the nation of Israel as my son, but is also prophetically referring to Jesus.
Is that what you mean there, so far?
So, we have a passage in Exodus that is literally referring to the nation of Israel as my son, but is also prophetically referring to Jesus. Is that what you mean there, so far? If you mean as a nation with land boundaries, etc, at the time of Exodus, sure, no disagreement there. But, Israel was a nation of people, were the descendants of Abraham that, through Moses and Joshua, went to the land promised to Abraham over 400 years ago, and thus began a nation with boundaries (no king at the time). On a related note for others that may read this, since the question comes up regarding how they treated the people of the land during Joshua's time, God had told Abraham over 400 years earlier that the time of reckoning for their sins was coming. They were pretty depraved by the time Joshua led Israel there. |
|
|
|
|
Well, then as you point out, things will have to change for them to survive.
In fact, given the scripture posted somewhere on this thread (would have to go look), the attack on Israel that is being referred to comes when Israel is not expecting it, and certainly beyond anything they can do about it.
One of several reasons why this current crisis is not the crisis referred to in this passage.
|
|
|
|
|
When the young nation of Israel came out of Egypt, God called that nation "my son" in Exodus 4:22. When the baby Jesus came out of Egypt, God said, "Out of Egypt have I called my son." Matthew 2:15.
So, we have a passage in Exodus that is literally referring to the nation of Israel as my son, but is also prophetically referring to Jesus.
Is that what you mean there, so far?
|
|
|
|
|
The verse I gave from Romans clearly shows that Israel is not referring to Christians. Are you disagreeing with that? Or are you meaning something else there?
I am not disagreeing that Israel can refer to other than the nation elsewhere, depending on context.
|
|
|
|
|
In Daniel 9, Daniel hears in response to his prayers concering the captivity of the Jews and their restoration the folowing below. Only 69 weeks of years has passed. The rest below has already been fulfilled. Jesus, the annointed one, is cut off after 62 weeks of years (which came after 7 weeks of years in the previous verse).
24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy.
25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times.
26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined.
27 And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and upon the wing of abominations [shall come] one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall [wrath] be poured out upon the desolate.
|
|
|
|
|
It is clear, in Romans 11 for example, that he is talking about Israel the nation - as it was (when he wrote) rejecting Jesus.
It is not Christians here below that are experiencing the hardening. Israel here below is not symbolic.
25 For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant of this mystery, lest ye be wise in your own conceits, that a hardening in part hath befallen Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in;
26 and so all Israel shall be saved: even as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer; He shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
|
|
|
|
What is happening is because they breed like dogs with litters of more than a dozen per family, they are out-breeding the secular and other non-Orthodox citizens. There is pressure on the secular to emigrate which will further increase the Orthodox as a percentage of the population. Remember, they won't don the army uniform and defend their state so the onus remains with a steadily decreasing number of non-orthodox Jews. There will come a time when there won't be enough taxpayers to fund the Orthodox lifestyle. Will American taxpayers take up the task?
Israel won't last long as a state as envisioned by Zionists under these circumstances.
That is pretty interesting, and probably has alot of merit. Why wont the orthodox not fight in the army? |
|
|
|
|
Ok I think I need to revise that. The nation of Israel coming into being - Truman recognizing it may have been influenced by prophecy, I dont know. It was influenced, from what I understand, from the Bible, but also from what the Jews went through in Europe, etc.
And I was commenting on US foreign policy - Iranian foreign policy may very well be influenced by Shia eschatalogy.
I don't think the invasion of Iraq, or support of Libya, or giving bunker bombs to Israel recently (whatever the merits of those actions), were due to giving heed to any prophetic understanding.
|
|
|
|
Ancient prophesy ?That is just a lame excuse for continued hatred and prejudice.
I don't see the Jews declaring a holy war. No one really give a flying fuck about ancient prophesy. There are people with stone-age intellect with their fingers on nuclear weapons.
Matthew 24:22 22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened. Niether do I, and i agree people will use their interpretations of prophesy to not only gain political power, but guide foreign policy. Israel isn't powerful enough on their own to do that, nor do i think they want to . I would disagree with you, about God having no more plans for the actual nation of Israel - he has some unfinished prophecies otherwise. Including what Jesus says in Acts about restoring the kingdom of Israel, and Paul in Romans. That does not negate God have a dual purpose to some of the passages. But, either way, yes, one would want to exercise great care in foreign policy in seeking to bring about any such. Nor do I think anyone generally has. |
|
|
|
|
The current confrontation with Iran does not seem to fit in with the scenario described by Ezekiel (though it may be one of the steps along the way).
And, on a related note, Rosenburg wrote a fctional book called the 12th Iman - some of the overlapping themes with the news lately is interesting.
|
|
|
|
That's the thing about obscure, unspecific, nonsensical "prophesy", you can make it say anything you'd like.
That is what is so interesting about several of his points - many of the prophecies he points to are far from obscure, etc. Which is why several political leaders have found them of interest, given today's current events. |
|
|
|
|
That is not unusual (spiritual Israel), both in prophecy and application. I think (I am not sure though) that it also somehow applies to how some Christians view the US (how they approach the Old Testament).
As far as Joel Rosenberg, he has written some interesting and popular fiction - fiction that seems even some political leaders have taken an interest in (it being fiction based on biblical prophesy). But, it is only recently that I am reading a non fiction book by him, a quite interesting one, on today's Moslems, and the struggles going on between three main groups.
|
|
|
|
|
As a nation? I do. At least, Zachariah is talking about the Jews turning to Him who they have pierced and mourning over it.
The temple - I dont remember if it is mentioned in Revelation. But, you see in the epistles the writers referring to the Old Testament - they accepted it as the Word of God, as did Jesus. So (and I am not familiar with the passages), if it does refer to a rebuilt temple in the future, I would not discount it simply because it is in the OT
|
|
|
|
An interesting passage discussing the repentance of the Jews as they look upon Him whom they have pierced.
8 In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.
9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
An interesting passage discussing the repentance of the Jews as they look upon Him whom they have pierced. just wonder which passage, but it still could mean something other then a blood jew Romans 2-25-29 25For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? 28For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God. Some speak about a new Jerusalem Romans is referring to a believer; Zachariah is referring to someone who has not accepted the Messiah. In this case, Jews who have not (many have of course, even in Israel, but still quite the majority). On top of it, since even Paul refers to physical Jews in his writings, and thus context helps, the Zach passage also refers to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the House of David. Zach is referring to the Jews themselves. |
|
|
|
|
An interesting passage discussing the repentance of the Jews as they look upon Him whom they have pierced.
8 In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.
9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
|
|
|
|
I'm not so sure all this pans out with the current countries we see. In the book of Daniel the vision he saw in the kings dream was made up of 4 powers reinstating themselves in our day. Babylon, persia, greece and Rome. The last one Rome which was made of iron, and feet of iron and clay, would be a world empire made up of secular and religious power which would be the beast and false prophet lead by the anti-christ given power from satan
This evil trinity so to speak makes war with the saints. Powers from the north i believe is symbolic to represent evil, such an example would be when the south of Israel was the last standing, as northern part drifted toward idolatry
There's others examples of this north and south representing good and evil that i can't remember right now, if i have time i'll look for it
That is interesting - are you saying that conflicts with what Joel is suggesting above? In the sense that he believes Israel becoming a nation plays a major role then yes in conflicts. The bible says when the fig tree is in leave, however they are not bearing fruits, or believing in Jesus. They are just a sign the time is near, because Jews have a homeland thats all, but they play no major role. God's church is still scattered with believers all over, not the churches themselves so much because which denominations or sect leads? I think the larger churches, in particular the papacy, is where the false prophet may arise. This coupled with an alliance with other large denominations and political powers Where does Daniel say that Israel does not play a major role as suggested by his fellow prophet Ezekiel? I'm not an expert i just mix and compare what i read and understand. The term "Israel" has been defined in different ways not just as a nation, same as the word Jew. So just looking at this from the point that the nation of Israel will turn to Jesus as a national policy seems far fetched. They seem a combination of secular as well as old school. On the other hand Paul speaks about the Jews being grafted back into the tree or body, with the Gentiles and even warned the Gentiles the Jews could be favored again. I'm rarely dogmatic when i discuss scripture Ah, ok. Yeah, you are right, one does have to look at the context when the word 'Israel' appears - true for anything, really, though alot of things will mean what they say when isolated. But, context does add flavor - sometimes alot - to a passage (and not just scripture). |
|
|
|
|
made a mistake shooting the glock 42 today... the slide caught my hand pretty bad, no stitches needed, but it hurt like hell lol.. damn big hands and small guns don't mix.
|
|
|
|
I'm not so sure all this pans out with the current countries we see. In the book of Daniel the vision he saw in the kings dream was made up of 4 powers reinstating themselves in our day. Babylon, persia, greece and Rome. The last one Rome which was made of iron, and feet of iron and clay, would be a world empire made up of secular and religious power which would be the beast and false prophet lead by the anti-christ given power from satan
This evil trinity so to speak makes war with the saints. Powers from the north i believe is symbolic to represent evil, such an example would be when the south of Israel was the last standing, as northern part drifted toward idolatry
There's others examples of this north and south representing good and evil that i can't remember right now, if i have time i'll look for it
That is interesting - are you saying that conflicts with what Joel is suggesting above? In the sense that he believes Israel becoming a nation plays a major role then yes in conflicts. The bible says when the fig tree is in leave, however they are not bearing fruits, or believing in Jesus. They are just a sign the time is near, because Jews have a homeland thats all, but they play no major role. God's church is still scattered with believers all over, not the churches themselves so much because which denominations or sect leads? I think the larger churches, in particular the papacy, is where the false prophet may arise. This coupled with an alliance with other large denominations and political powers Where does Daniel say that Israel does not play a major role as suggested by his fellow prophet Ezekiel? |
|
|
|
I'm not so sure all this pans out with the current countries we see. In the book of Daniel the vision he saw in the kings dream was made up of 4 powers reinstating themselves in our day. Babylon, persia, greece and Rome. The last one Rome which was made of iron, and feet of iron and clay, would be a world empire made up of secular and religious power which would be the beast and false prophet lead by the anti-christ given power from satan
This evil trinity so to speak makes war with the saints. Powers from the north i believe is symbolic to represent evil, such an example would be when the south of Israel was the last standing, as northern part drifted toward idolatry
There's others examples of this north and south representing good and evil that i can't remember right now, if i have time i'll look for it
That is interesting - are you saying that conflicts with what Joel is suggesting above? |
|
|
|
The ST is vastly superior to the MS3 except for HP. It's not that far off though. I got my ST3 for 24.4. Best car all around. Mine is tuned ($500) and is nodded wrx fast.
You can try, might even manage to put up a half way appreciable fight, but you ain't gonna win: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flqp-Lh-gcwstopped at stage 2 still Nobody was comparing an sti. A Cobb tuned wrx, yes.Tune of an ST can out it at 240 HP and 330ish tq to the wheels.Don't be mad you bought and old pos design that loses every single comparo. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
